Many routing protocols have been developed to improve the lifetime, bandwidth reusability and scalability of the Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs). The operation of routing protocols is difficult to understand and some problems may occur while developing these protocols. Simulation is a relatively fast way of estimating these protocols and understating what is happening in the network. Thus, this paper presents an open source Graphical-based educational simulation tool called Gbest-WSN for simulating routing protocols of the static and mobile, homogeneous and heterogeneous WSNs. Gbest-WSN tool has a user-friendly interface that helps the user to select the routing protocol and define the network configuration. It is provided with four routing protocols; namely LEACH, LEACH-Mobile, immune algorithm-based and genetic algorithm-based routing protocols. Also, it allows the user to update the existing routing protocols and add a new routing protocol. Gbest-WSN is provided with radio, coverage and mobility models for modeling the hardware of the sensor node. It shows a detailed 2D and 3D graphical perception for what is happing during the routing process. Also, it has the ability to compare the simulation results of different simulation methods or different network configurations. In addition, it allows the user to save and load simulation scenarios and also exports the graphical results on PDF files and the statistical results on excel or mat files. Moreover, Gbest-WSN is provided with html help documents to help the user how to use it. The illustrative simulation examples clarified that the Gbest-WSN is a helpful tool for the students, teachers and researchers who work in the field of WSNs.

Many routing protocols have been developed to improve the lifetime, bandwidth reusability and scalability of the Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs). The operation of routing protocols is difficult to understand and some problems may occur while developing these protocols. Simulation is a relatively fast way of estimating these protocols and understating what is happening in the network. Thus, this paper presents an open source Graphical-based educational simulation tool called Gbest-WSN for simulating routing protocols of the static and mobile, homogeneous and heterogeneous WSNs. Gbest-WSN tool has a user-friendly interface that helps the user to select the routing protocol and define the network configuration. It is provided with four routing protocols; namely LEACH, LEACH-Mobile, immune algorithm-based and genetic algorithm-based routing protocols. Also, it allows the user to update the existing routing protocols and add a new routing protocol. Gbest-WSN is provided with radio, coverage and mobility models for modeling the hardware of the sensor node. It shows a detailed 2D and 3D graphical perception for what is happing during the routing process. Also, it has the ability to compare the simulation results of different simulation methods or different network configurations. In addition, it allows the user to save and load simulation scenarios and also exports the graphical results on PDF files and the statistical results on excel or mat files. Moreover, Gbest-WSN is provided with html help documents to help the user how to use it. The illustrative simulation examples clarified that the Gbest-WSN is a helpful tool for the students, teachers and researchers who work in the field of WSNs.

Introducing mobility to Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) puts new challenges particularly in designing of routing protocols. Mobility can be applied to the sensor nodes and/or the sink node in the network. Many routing protocols have been developed to support the mobility of WSNs. These protocols are divided depending on the routing structure into hierarchical-based, flat-based, and location-based routing protocols. However, the hierarchical-based routing protocols outperform the other routing types in saving energy, scalability, and extending lifetime of Mobile WSNs (MWSNs). Selecting an appropriate hierarchical routing protocol for specific applications is an important and difficult task. Therefore, this paper focuses on reviewing some of the recently hierarchical-based routing protocols that are developed in the last five years for MWSNs. This survey divides the hierarchical-based routing protocols into two broad groups, namely, classical-based and optimized-based routing protocols. Also, we present a detailed classification of the reviewed protocols according to the routing approach, control manner, mobile element, mobility pattern, network architecture, clustering attributes, protocol operation, path establishment, communication paradigm, energy model, protocol objectives, and applications. Moreover, a comparison between the reviewed protocols is investigated in this survey depending on delay, network size, energy-efficiency, and scalability while mentioning the advantages and drawbacks of each protocol. Finally, we summarize and conclude the paper with future directions.

Introducing mobility to Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) puts new challenges particularly in designing of routing protocols. Mobility can be applied to the sensor nodes and/or the sink node in the network. Many routing protocols have been developed to support the mobility of WSNs. These protocols are divided depending on the routing structure into hierarchical-based, flat-based, and location-based routing protocols. However, the hierarchical-based routing protocols outperform the other routing types in saving energy, scalability, and extending lifetime of Mobile WSNs (MWSNs). Selecting an appropriate hierarchical routing protocol for specific applications is an important and difficult task. Therefore, this paper focuses on reviewing some of the recently hierarchical-based routing protocols that are developed in the last five years for MWSNs. This survey divides the hierarchical-based routing protocols into two broad groups, namely, classical-based and optimized-based routing protocols. Also, we present a detailed classification of the reviewed protocols according to the routing approach, control manner, mobile element, mobility pattern, network architecture, clustering attributes, protocol operation, path establishment, communication paradigm, energy model, protocol objectives, and applications. Moreover, a comparison between the reviewed protocols is investigated in this survey depending on delay, network size, energy-efficiency, and scalability while mentioning the advantages and drawbacks of each protocol. Finally, we summarize and conclude the paper with future directions.

Introducing mobility to Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) puts new challenges particularly in designing of routing protocols. Mobility can be applied to the sensor nodes and/or the sink node in the network. Many routing protocols have been developed to support the mobility of WSNs. These protocols are divided depending on the routing structure into hierarchical-based, flat-based, and location-based routing protocols. However, the hierarchical-based routing protocols outperform the other routing types in saving energy, scalability, and extending lifetime of Mobile WSNs (MWSNs). Selecting an appropriate hierarchical routing protocol for specific applications is an important and difficult task. Therefore, this paper focuses on reviewing some of the recently hierarchical-based routing protocols that are developed in the last five years for MWSNs. This survey divides the hierarchical-based routing protocols into two broad groups, namely, classical-based and optimized-based routing protocols. Also, we present a detailed classification of the reviewed protocols according to the routing approach, control manner, mobile element, mobility pattern, network architecture, clustering attributes, protocol operation, path establishment, communication paradigm, energy model, protocol objectives, and applications. Moreover, a comparison between the reviewed protocols is investigated in this survey depending on delay, network size, energy-efficiency, and scalability while mentioning the advantages and drawbacks of each protocol. Finally, we summarize and conclude the paper with future directions.

NULL

NULL

NULL

NULL

NULL